My guess is that the windows install probably uses the same lowest-common-denominator graphics mode (it looks like it to me) regardless of video hardware and the Linux X-based setup is using different modes during setup, dependent upon which video card it thinks it detects. The Windows-based setup doesn't go into card-specific graphic modes until installation is done. If this is the case then the x-based setup routines should be written for a standard 640x480x16 mode, regardless of which video hardware is detected during setup, no?...
a shot in the dark Andy ---------- > From: Bart Szyszka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Evan Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Brigette Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Ethan Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: Why > Date: Friday, December 03, 1999 7:11 PM > > > LinuxPPC uses the same installer Redhat uses, recently they made a X > > based installer but it was quite broken to begin with and fails far > > to often. (X based installers will always be unreliable IMO just > > because of the wildly differing video hardware) > > Now what makes Windows so incapable of having these same problems? > I've never heard of anyone having trouble running the Win95 installer > on a system that just had DOS because of video hardware. > > -- > Bart Szyszka [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ:4982727 > B Grafyx http://www.bgrafyx.com > Join AllAdvantage.com and get paid to surf the Web! > http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ARD582 > > > -- > Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null >
